German National Guideline on the management of pilonidal disease: update 2020

Abstract

Background: The present German National Guideline is an updated version of previous Guideline published in 2014. It aims to compare various treatment methods and to assist physicians with evidence-based recommendations.

Methods: Systemic literature review.

Results: Three types of disease manifestation could be differentiated: asymptomatic disease, an acute abscess, and the chronic pilonidal disease. At present, there is no treatment method fulfilling all desired criteria: simple, painless procedure associated with rapid wound healing, and low recurrence rate. Thus, treatment modality should be tailored to disease manifestation and extent.

Conclusion: Asymptomatic pilonidal disease should not be treated. A pilonidal abscess should be unroofed. After resolution of the acute inflammation, the disease should be treated definitely. As for today, sinus excision is the standard treatment of the chronic pilonidal disease. Wide excision and open treatment of chronic disease is a safe procedure which, however, leads to prolonged secondary healing and time off-work, as well as to considerable recurrence rate. The extent of excision should be as limited as possible. Excision and midline wound closure is associated with impaired outcomes. Today, it has become obsolete. Minimally invasive procedures (e.g., pit picking surgery) represent a treatment option for chronic pilonidal disease. However, the recurrence rate is higher compared to excision procedures. Nevertheless, they may be used for small primary disease. Off-midline procedures should be used for disease not suitable for minimally invasive treatments. The Limberg flap and the Karydakis procedure are two best described methods which are associated with similar short- and long-term results.

Keywords: Pilonidal abscess; Pilonidal disease; Pilonidals sinus; Surgery.

Fig. 1

Transformation process from level of evidence to grade of recommendation. Recommendations are based not only on level of evidence of available studies but also on preferences, applicability, cultural traditions, values, etc.